Suchergebnisse

Why some powers manage to coordinate their security efforts while others confront each other as rivals is still one of the most relevant and debated questions in the field of IR theory. The dissertation wants to give a contribution to this important debate. In particular, the main goal of the research is to analyse the dynamics of great power interactions after the end of hegemonic conflicts, that is to understand why, following the defeat of the common enemies, some of the winning allies continue to cooperate, while others begin to engage in political and military competition. In order to understand this difference, the study compares the explanatory value of two rival theoretical perspectives: neorealism, in its main version of the balance of power framework, and a liberal approach focused on domestic politics. The thesis is divided in two sections. In the first, I do summarize the main assumptions and predictions of the theories, from which I derive two different sets of hypotheses on the evolution of post-war great power relations. In the second part, I test the hypotheses by focusing on two cases of post-war alignment dynamics: 1) the relations among Austria, Prussia, Russia, Great Britain and France after the Napoleonic wars; 2) the relations among the US, the UK, France and Italy after the end of WWI. The historical cases disconfirm the logic of the balance of power and confirm the liberal hypotheses, seeing that the results of the analysis show changes in the domestic structures of the great powers had a much larger impact on the emergence of new alliances and rivalries than did the international distribution of power. In the conclusion of the dissertation, I provide the reader with a discussion of the main theoretical implications of the empirical findings.